Cited by

In re Niky R., 203 Ariz. at 390, ¶¶ 12-13; ¶ 14 (App. 2000) (“A juvenile court is not required to follow the guidelines, but it must consider them in making disposition.”).

¶11 ¶ 7 (App. 2000), Mother argues that the juvenile court must "affirmatively establish awareness of the due process rights essential to a contested trial," including advising the parent of the burden of proof in a termination hearing.

§ 6-304(C)(1); ¶ 14 (App. 2000); A.R.S.

¶ 14 (App. 2000); A.R.S.

“A juvenile court is not required to follow the guidelines, but it must consider them in making disposition.” ¶ 14 (App. 2000) (citing A.R.S.

Delinquency Action No. JV-9404492, and ¶ 14 (App. 2000)).

Delinquency Action No. JV-9404492, and ¶ 14 (App. 2000)).

first offense.” ¶14 P.3d 1034 (App. 2000), Juvenile further contends the court abused its discretion by placing Juvenile with her sister in Oklahoma because “a less restrictive placement” — i.e. placement with Father — was available, making placement in Oklahoma an inappropriate means of “treating” Juvenile.

at ¶ 12; ¶ 14, (“A juvenile court is not required to follow the guidelines, but it must consider them in making disposition.”).

Cf. In re Richard M., 196 Ariz. at 86, ¶ 10 , 993 P.2d at 1050 (“A court cannot order a juvenile into detention without a petition to revoke probation or without a hearing because to do so would violate the juvenile’s right to due process.”); -94, ¶¶ 7-11 , -37 (App.2000) (vacating juvenile court’s acceptance of juvenile’s admission to probation violation where record did not affirmatively establish that juvenile was advised of or otherwise aware of her constitutional rights and the potential co

¶¶ 8-10 , (noting that the failure to comply with the rules may or may not require reversal).

¶ 8 , (observing failure of court to comply with rules may or may not require reversal).